ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-446 of 2021.

_______________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_______________________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

07.02.2022

                        Mr. Ahmed Bux Abro, Advocate for the applicants.

Mr. Riaz Ahmed Soomro, Advocate for the complainant.

Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl.P.G for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH - J;- It is alleged that the applicants with rest of the culprits, after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, committed murder of Mst.Nidrat by strangulating her throat, and then attempted to destroy the evidence by giving it cover of suicide in order to save themselves from legal consequences, for that the present case was registered. 

                        The applicants on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned           1^st Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC, Larkana, have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application under section 498-A Cr.PC.

                        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the police; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about three days; the complainant is not an eye witness of the incident and co-accused Sabir Ali with similar role has already been admitted to post arrest bail by learned trial Court; therefore, the applicants are entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry, consistency and malafide.

                        Learned Addl.P.G for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have recorded no objection to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants.

                        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                        The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about three days; such delay having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked. The complainant is not an eye witness of the incident and co-accused Sabir Ali with utmost similar role has already been admitted to post arrest bail by learned trial Court. In that situation, no useful purpose would be served if the applicants are taken into custody and then are admitted to bail on point of consistency.

                        In case of Muhammad Ramzan Vs. Zafarullah and another              (1986 SCMR-1380), it was held by the Honourable Court that;

“no useful purpose was likely to be served if bail of accused(respondent) was cancelled on any technical ground because after arrest he could again be allowed bail on the ground that similarly placed other accused were already on bail”.

                        In view of above, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

                        The instant criminal bail application is disposed of accordingly.

J U D G E